Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
18-1248
|
In re: Maria A. Basave de Guillen
Notice of Delinquent Assessment Lien, which purported to secure future assessments, was impermissible under the Davis-Stirling Act, which limits the lien to the amount specified in the notice. |
Bankruptcy |
|
W. Lafferty | Sep. 4, 2019 |
C082231
|
Moore v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Because Unemployment Program Forbearance Plan Notice modified deed of trust and note, the contract documents, as modified, were ambiguous; thus, remand was warranted. |
Contracts |
|
R. Robie | Sep. 3, 2019 |
F075781
|
Collins v. Thurmond
Appellants' state equal protection claim survived due to evidence of disparate impact, but their federal equal protection claim failed due to lack of sufficient allegations of discriminatory motive. |
Constitutional Law |
|
K. Meehan | Sep. 3, 2019 |
F075781
|
Modification: Collins v. Thurmond
Appellants' state equal protection claim survived due to evidence of disparate impact, but their federal equal protection claim failed due to lack of sufficient allegations of discriminatory motive. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Sep. 3, 2019 | |
D075217
|
Quidel Corporation v. Superior Court (San Diego)
Business and Professions Code Section 16600 does not invalidate all contractual noncompete provisions, outside the employment context; thus, summary adjudication was not appropriate. |
Business Law |
|
R. Huffman | Sep. 3, 2019 |
G055482
|
People v. Force
Prosecutors are not allowed to engage in conduct that undermines the willingness of a defense witness to take the stand by making comments about the prospect of perjury before trial. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
W. Bedsworth | Sep. 3, 2019 |
B292294
|
People v. Hall
Defendant made no claim of error to trial court, either at time of sentencing or after, as required by Penal Code Section 1237.2; thus claim was dismissed. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
E. Grimes | Sep. 3, 2019 |
B293676
|
Conservatorship of M.M.
Welfare and Institutions Code Section 5350's time limitations are not mandatory, but directory; therefore there are no consequences for failing to begin trial within the statutory period. |
Conservatorship |
|
E. Grimes | Sep. 3, 2019 |
B290408
|
Conservatorship of D.C.
Despite trial court's failure to state specific factors underlying its order for involuntary medication, substantial evidence supported the order such that no reversible error occurred. |
Conservatorship |
|
E. Grimes | Sep. 3, 2019 |
B292775
|
Jeffra v. Cal. State Lottery
Although his claims arose from protected activity, plaintiff provided sufficient evidence that his claim for retaliation under the California Whistleblower Protection Act had at least minimal merit, defeating defendant's anti-SLAPP motion. |
Anti-SLAPP |
|
E. Grimes | Sep. 3, 2019 |
E069158
|
Precision Framing Systems Inc. v. Luzuriaga
Under Civil Code Section 8414(a) if a mechanical lien is filed before the contractor has ceased work, the filing is considered premature and the mechanical lien is void and unenforceable. |
Civil Procedure |
|
M. Ramirez | Sep. 3, 2019 |
17-50358
|
U.S. v. Chi
Elements of 'bribery of a public official' were included in South Korean Criminal Code Article 129, so it fell within 18 U.S.C. Section 1956(c)(7)(B)(iv) and qualified as an offense against a foreign nation. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
C. Bea | Sep. 3, 2019 |
18-55119
|
Capp v. County of San Diego
Defendant not entitled to qualified immunity because plaintiff pled a plausible First Amendment retaliation claim; thus, district court's dismissal reversed in part. |
Constitutional Law |
|
M. Smith | Sep. 3, 2019 |
S244630
|
OTO L.L.C. v. Kho
Arbitration agreement was unconscionable due to substantial procedural unconscionability based on coercive circumstances surrounding its execution, and sufficient substantive unconscionability based on its one-sided impacts on the signatory employee. |
Arbitration |
|
C. Corrigan | Aug. 30, 2019 |
S239510
|
Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Co.
California's common law notice-prejudice rule is a fundamental public policy for the purpose of choice of law analysis; thus, case remanded to determine whether notice-prejudice rule applies. |
Civil Procedure |
|
M. Chin | Aug. 30, 2019 |
G056786
|
In re Vaquera
Under Section 667.61, a pleading itself is a valid form of notice if it alleged facts sufficient to give the defendant fair notice of the alleged crime and sentence enhancement. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
E. Moore | Aug. 30, 2019 |
B291510
|
Conservatorship of K.P.
Lanterman-Petris-Short Act Section 5352 permits treatment facilities to initiate conservatorship proceedings when admitting an uncooperative patient and is not considered an element for jury instruction. |
Civil Procedure |
|
V. Chavez | Aug. 30, 2019 |
B285793
|
De la Carriere v. Greene
Defendant obtained affirmative relief on cross-complaint and obtained greater relief in the action despite plaintiff's post-judgment success, so defendant was prevailing party for Civil Code Section 1717 fee award purposes. |
Civil Procedure |
|
T. Bigelow | Aug. 30, 2019 |
B292083
|
In re R.C.
'Concealed' in context of Penal Code Section 647(j)(3)(A) can take on various plain meanings, and defendant's argument attempting to apply only one meaning was unpersuasive. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
B. Currey | Aug. 30, 2019 |
G056249
|
Lopez v. Bartlett Care Center, LLC
Resident-Facility Arbitration Agreement was properly found unenforceable due to unconscionability, and the court deferred to the trial court's credibility determination favoring plaintiff in the face of conflicting evidence. |
Arbitration |
|
R. Aronson | Aug. 30, 2019 |
C085657
|
Bustos v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Under Section 2924.12(h) of the California Homeowner Bill of Rights attorney fees and costs may be awarded when a prevailing borrower obtains temporary or permanent injunctive relief. |
Remedies |
|
M. Butz | Aug. 30, 2019 |
A153155
|
People v. Buchanan
Trial courts have discretion to impose concurrent sentences for multiple serious or violent felonies against a single victim if they were committed on the 'same occasion.' |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
B. Jones | Aug. 30, 2019 |
17-73153
|
Lopez-Aguilar v. Barr
Order |
|
Aug. 30, 2019 | ||
17-16858
|
Animal Legal Defense Fund v. USDA
5 U.S.C. Section 552(a)(4)(B) provides district courts with authority to order agency to post records in online reading room; thus, dismissal of Freedom of Information Act claim reversed. |
Administrative Agencies |
|
N. Smith | Aug. 30, 2019 |
S230923
|
Modification: In re Ricardo P.
Because there was no indication that defendant used or will use electronic devices in connection with any illegal activity, record was insufficient to justify substantial burdens imposed by electronics search condition. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
G. Liu | Aug. 30, 2019 |
G056559
|
Franco v. Greystone Ridge Condominium
Arbitration agreements retroactively apply to claims filed before the signing of the arbitration agreement, when the agreement is clear and no qualifying language limits its applicability. |
Employment Law |
|
R. Fybel | Aug. 29, 2019 |
E068870
|
Benton v. Benton
Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.17(e) provides that denial of a special motion to strike an anti-SLAPP complaint because the action is exempt under that section, may not be appealed. |
Anti-SLAPP |
|
M. Raphael | Aug. 29, 2019 |
H045698
|
Rodriguez v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
Government Code Section 21174, not Section 21171, provides the applicable time limitation for a CalPERS member to request determination of industrial causation, and petitioner complied with this time limitation. |
Workers' Compensation |
|
M. Greenwood | Aug. 29, 2019 |
B281175
|
People v. Cadena
Defendant's life sentence violated constitutional prohibition against cruel or unusual punishment when defendant briefly touched minor victims over their clothes, was remorseful and had no prior criminal history. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
F. Rothschild | Aug. 29, 2019 |
18-35908
|
Stephens v. Union Pacific Railroad
Plaintiff failed to create a genuine issue of fact on whether any asbestos exposure that might have occurred was a substantial factor in causing his disease, so his negligence claim failed. |
Torts |
|
E. Miller | Aug. 29, 2019 |